Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Teresa to pay off the debt using her personal property is a judgment in personam which the court
cannot do because it only acquired jurisdiction over the res and not over the person of Teresa.
On the issue of extrinsic fraud, the Court of Appeals, agreeing with PCRB, is correct that there is
none in the case at bar. Extrinsic fraud exists when there is a fraudulent act committed by
the prevailing party outside of the trial of the case, whereby the defeated party was prevented from
presenting fully his side of the case by fraud or deception practiced on him by the prevailing
party. Extrinsic fraud is present where the unsuccessful party had been prevented from exhibiting
fully his case, by fraud or deception practiced on him by his opponent, as by keeping him away
from court, a false promise of a compromise; or where the defendant never had knowledge of the
suit, being kept in ignorance by the acts of the plaintiff; or where an attorney fraudulently or without
authority assumes to represent a party and connives at his defeat; or where the attorney regularly
employed corruptly sells out his clients interest to the other side. The above is not applicable in the
case of Teresa. It was not PCRB which made any fraud. It should be noted that spouses Biaco
were co-defendants in the case and shared the same interest.